TServo2049 said:
I think Cameron used blues in Aliens, and in Terminator. I was just saying that 1.) While it was never a primary color like in modern regrades, teal was NOT an invention of the 2000s; all 80s prints I've seen have SOME amount of teal as a secondary/tertiary color in blue-cast/dark/night scenes, so video transfers with NO teal are probably not accurate; 2.) I'm not sure that the theatrical prints were as overpoweringly blue as the 1995 laserdisc.
The "blue" version looks a bit like some of the prints I've seen projected at the Castro. Yeah, maybe a little TOO cold, but I don't recall the prints I saw of Streets of Fire, Legend, Pee-Wee's Big Adventure, Lethal Weapon, The Running Man or Evil Dead II having skin tones looking AS red as the "red" version. Can you get skin tones closer to the trailer images? Sure, we just said they may not be theatrically accurate, but they still look close to skin tones I've seen in actual 80s prints.
Another characteristic I've seen in 80s prints - very often, fire looks quite yellow. Anybody ever notice that with 80s prints, or is this due to me seeing all these prints at the same theater through the same projector?
Man, I wish I could see a print.
I think we are in agreement TServo. I do think there was blue and teal before its current craze . When there exists a movie like Suspira, any color can exist on film. And I do agree that Aliens probably has blue in it. My experiments also kind of confirm my suspicion about that. I think the 95 LD is a good attempt to try to duplicate the colors of a release print. They just pushed it too far. My 35mm trailer test seems to have blue just less then the 95.
My big problem with Aliens is the green, which Cameron added to this, Terminator and for some reason Titanic. I'm pretty confident saying a blanket green is not right. That's modern color timing.
The "blue" version was an attempt to get white back to something concerning white from my "Red" version". It looks good in a vacuum but the problem is without the red there, the background colors tend to go back to green (see the back of that shot and the bottom of Apone's hat bill). Whereas in the "red" version the backgrounds are the light, pale blue. See the surface of LV-426. Frankly, the "red" also matches the 35mm trailers better since those scenes are from later in the film where skin tones change to redder and the lighting goes darker for mood. Fire also look more yellow with the red version. That's not to say its perfect, the shot of Hicks holding the shotgun looking back isn't right. There are a bunch of scenes that are wrong, mostly at the beginning where lighting is cold. But between the 35mm frames and the LD I think that's a little closer to what Aliens looks may have looked liked in theaters.
I'm thinking splitting the difference between the red and blue versions. Here is a bit of refinement:
You are right 35mm print is the way to go. Hopefully someone can find a copy.
bigrob said:
Annoying thing is that I've seen a 35mm print of Aliens TWICE on the big screen lol. From what I remember, the blue timt was there
The Prince Charles cinema in London show it regularly. Will check their programme
If it does come maybe you can take a pic or two? Or a least some notes. I have the blue just need to know how much saturation to put back in.